David wrote:The talent Nelson had, all played the same position. You could play two on the floor at a time but they played out of position to make it work. Plus, Antoine Walker is one of the biggest ball-hogs ever. He's not that good of a shooter. The other teams played off of him and kept Dirk from receiving the pass from Walker. Antoine didn't want to pass it anyway.

Antoine also proved to be a terrible free throw shooter. He almost had a mental thing about it. Antoine could drive the basket but if he got fouled, it did no good. He'd shoot 50% at best. Until the Mavs got him, I thought he was a pretty talented player.

There are more things than talent. It has to be the right talent, used in the right way. It was a miracle the Mavs won 52 games that year. The roster was an abortion.

uptempo wrote:1. Nelson put that team together, including acquiring the players.

Donnie put the team together at Cuban's direction. All the trades were made to bail Mark's @ss out of Raef's bad contract. It was Nelson who played the good soldier and made do and then took the blame because the team was less than it was before.

uptempo wrote:2. Nelson did not emphasis defense with his team.

They hired Del Harris to run the defense. He's still there, running AJ's defense.

uptempo wrote:3. AJ took that talent, emphasized playing defense (a necessity to advance in the playoffs), and got the team to the NBA Finals, something that Nelson has never done.

The Mavs now have centers, or weren't you paying attention? Statistically, the defense is virtually identical to the Nelson teams.

uptempo wrote:You should be appreciative of the job that AJ has done instead of pining for the return of Nelson. He, Nelson, is now our problem at Golden State.

I'm glad the Mavs have a good coach. They had a better coach. He's the solution at Golden State, not the problem.

uptempo wrote:Get over it; we don't need any Maverick trolls on the Golden State board.

I like going to the NBA finals. It's just that I think Nelson got cheated out of the opportunity to silence some very ignorant critics. Instead of calling names, perhaps you should check your facts.

The team that the Nelsons put together in Dallas was very much like the team that they had put together in Golden State. It was exciting to watch, however, deficient in defense and rebounding. Nelson Sr. was hired originally as GM and he immediately proceeded to dismantle the team in order to destroy any chance for Jim Clemons to succeed. Nelson Sr. did the same thing in Golden State to George Karl. Nelson had complete autonomy in personnel decisions, and he built an incomplete team in Dallas just like he did in Golden State.

Delmer was brought in to install the high post offense. Nelson had brought in Bob Weiss to Golden State to install the passing offense. Nelson's version of defense is to try to outscore the opponent, a fun concept during the regular season, but always fails in the playoffs (where defense and rebounding take precedence (just look at Miami, San Antonio, and Detroit (the last three NBA champions))).

If Nelson was a better coach than AJ, why didn't Nelson take a team with Steve Nash running the point and Michael Finley on the wing to the NBA finals?

We lived thru Nelson I a decade ago. He didn't do the job in Milwaukee; he didn't do the job in Golden State; he didn't do the job in NY; he didn't do the job in Dallas; and he won't do the job in Golden State. He is a good coach; however, to be a great coach, you have to win a championship. Al Attles is a better coach than Don Nelson; Al Attles coached a championship team.

So then why did you Jock Mussleman so much Who's the better coach between Nellie and your man Muss You were quick to point out early this summer that Mullin was trumped by the Kings by hiring a better coach in Muss than Monty, Well Nelson >>> Muss

"The plan that I have is flexible," Nelson said. "I want to get the max out of the team that I have, get them to play the best they can play. We're not talking about winning titles. We're talking about building the best team we have, and then go from there. Hopefully we'll talk about winning titles some time in the future."

uptempo wrote:The team that the Nelsons put together in Dallas was very much like the team that they had put together in Golden State. It was exciting to watch, however, deficient in defense and rebounding.

There are some similarities. Mainly due to the fact that Nelson takes over teams that are in trouble. Usually, successful teams don't change coaches.

uptempo wrote:Nelson Sr. was hired originally as GM and he immediately proceeded to dismantle the team in order to destroy any chance for Jim Clemons to succeed.

That's a laugh. Clemmons and Zack had just traded Jason Kidd. The Mavs were a reclaimation project when he took over.

uptempo wrote:Nelson Sr. did the same thing in Golden State to George Karl. Nelson had complete autonomy in personnel decisions, and he built an incomplete team in Dallas just like he did in Golden State.

You do know there's a salary cap, don't you? A coach has to go for the best players available. He's not allowed to get all the players he wants. He's limited in how much he can spend. Usually, there's a reason a player is available. He has to do things like take chances on unkown Germans with no US high school or US college experience. It's hard to learn the NBA game if you don't practice against NBA players.

uptempo wrote:Delmer was brought in to install the high post offense. Nelson had brought in Bob Weiss to Golden State to install the passing offense.

Wrong. Del's expertise is in defense. He's written books on the subject. Perhaps you could go to the library and check one out so you might learn something about basketball. I don't know about Bob Weiss except he is a vet coach that once assisted Dick Motta in Dallas and failed as a head coach.

uptempo wrote:Nelson's version of defense is to try to outscore the opponent, a fun concept during the regular season, but always fails in the playoffs (where defense and rebounding take precedence (just look at Miami, San Antonio, and Detroit (the last three NBA champions))).

No, Nelson outscores the other team to win the game. The winner has at least one more point than the loser, every time. You can look it up, if you don't believe me. You can also look up that Nelson's playoff teams have lost to a lower seeded team one time. Nelson beats the teams he's supposed to in the playoff. Also, he loses to the teams he's supposed to in the playoffs. Isn't that what it's all about? The better team wins. (I think last year's NBA finals was an exception)

uptempo wrote:If Nelson was a better coach than AJ, why didn't Nelson take a team with Steve Nash running the point and Michael Finley on the wing to the NBA finals?

His last, best chance, Dirk got injured in the WCFs and lost to SA. Any one of about 6 WC teams would have beaten NJ that year. Mark Cuban had Donnie dismantle the team to get rid of Raef's contract the next off season.

uptempo wrote:We lived thru Nelson I a decade ago.

GS hasn't been to playoffs since.

uptempo wrote:He didn't do the job in Milwaukee;

He did a great job in Milwaukee and his teams were noted for hard nosed defense, featuring All-NBA defender, Sydney Moncrief.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in Golden State;

He at least had them in the playoffs, a level not reached since he left.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in NY;

He was fired with a 34-25 record, better than his successors 13-10 record. He got an"incomplete" on that one.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in Dallas;

That's a flat out lie. He took a wreck of a team and turned it into a title contender. We were worried the team would move away it was so bad. Apathy abounded. That's the worst thing to have.

uptempo wrote:and he won't do the job in Golden State.

Opinion. Hide and watch.

uptempo wrote:He is a good coach; however, to be a great coach, you have to win a championship.

You have to have the right players. MJ, Pippen, Shaq and Kobe have made Phil Jackson into a great coach. The difference in good and great coaches is whether or not you have the right players and whether or not they buy what you're selling. Did Larry Brown suddenly turn into a bad coach when he got to NY? He was great in Detroit and as a college coach.

David wrote:The talent Nelson had, all played the same position. You could play two on the floor at a time but they played out of position to make it work. Plus, Antoine Walker is one of the biggest ball-hogs ever. He's not that good of a shooter. The other teams played off of him and kept Dirk from receiving the pass from Walker. Antoine didn't want to pass it anyway.

Antoine also proved to be a terrible free throw shooter. He almost had a mental thing about it. Antoine could drive the basket but if he got fouled, it did no good. He'd shoot 50% at best. Until the Mavs got him, I thought he was a pretty talented player.

There are more things than talent. It has to be the right talent, used in the right way. It was a miracle the Mavs won 52 games that year. The roster was an abortion.

You are right about the right talent used in the right way and that is the problem here with the Warriors!

I do think that that Mavs team could have done better and they could have traded Walker but kept Jamison rather than get Stackhouse, they may be better right now but you never know. It is working well with Avery!

five footer wrote:Nellie is Nellie. He has what it takes, he proven he has it, so the warriors will be ok. The only problem i have, we have a log Jam at the center position and also at the small forward position. What will Nellie do about that?, and will he find the right cobination?

Welcome five footer (you a kid or a midget?)

The Centers on the team right now are likely nothing but garbage that might have a future as role players (Biedrins at least).

The SF position is a real issue but hopefully Pietrus will play to his potential and dunnyboy will get traded or be found dead

John Patrick wrote:I think we have enough young prospects, TRADE for a SF using draft pick (unless it's high and there's a SERIOUSLY good pick).

I'm really for trading draft picks (if not lottery) over the next four years if needed to get better pieces to fit in the team. The players on the team are mostly all very young and there is no need for any more via the draft, unless there is a trade up for a higher pick that ensures getting a player of need

John Patrick wrote:I think we have enough young prospects, TRADE for a SF using draft pick (unless it's high and there's a SERIOUSLY good pick).

I'm really for trading draft picks (if not lottery) over the next four years if needed to get better pieces to fit in the team. The players on the team are mostly all very young and there is no need for any more via the draft, unless there is a trade up for a higher pick that ensures getting a player of need

As long as they have some kind of protection, I'm ok with trading picks, too.

uptempo wrote:The team that the Nelsons put together in Dallas was very much like the team that they had put together in Golden State. It was exciting to watch, however, deficient in defense and rebounding.

There are some similarities. Mainly due to the fact that Nelson takes over teams that are in trouble. Usually, successful teams don't change coaches.

uptempo wrote:Nelson Sr. was hired originally as GM and he immediately proceeded to dismantle the team in order to destroy any chance for Jim Clemons to succeed.

That's a laugh. Clemmons and Zack had just traded Jason Kidd. The Mavs were a reclaimation project when he took over.

uptempo wrote:Nelson Sr. did the same thing in Golden State to George Karl. Nelson had complete autonomy in personnel decisions, and he built an incomplete team in Dallas just like he did in Golden State.

You do know there's a salary cap, don't you? A coach has to go for the best players available. He's not allowed to get all the players he wants. He's limited in how much he can spend. Usually, there's a reason a player is available. He has to do things like take chances on unkown Germans with no US high school or US college experience. It's hard to learn the NBA game if you don't practice against NBA players.

uptempo wrote:Delmer was brought in to install the high post offense. Nelson had brought in Bob Weiss to Golden State to install the passing offense.

Wrong. Del's expertise is in defense. He's written books on the subject. Perhaps you could go to the library and check one out so you might learn something about basketball. I don't know about Bob Weiss except he is a vet coach that once assisted Dick Motta in Dallas and failed as a head coach.

uptempo wrote:Nelson's version of defense is to try to outscore the opponent, a fun concept during the regular season, but always fails in the playoffs (where defense and rebounding take precedence (just look at Miami, San Antonio, and Detroit (the last three NBA champions))).

No, Nelson outscores the other team to win the game. The winner has at least one more point than the loser, every time. You can look it up, if you don't believe me. You can also look up that Nelson's playoff teams have lost to a lower seeded team one time. Nelson beats the teams he's supposed to in the playoff. Also, he loses to the teams he's supposed to in the playoffs. Isn't that what it's all about? The better team wins. (I think last year's NBA finals was an exception)

uptempo wrote:If Nelson was a better coach than AJ, why didn't Nelson take a team with Steve Nash running the point and Michael Finley on the wing to the NBA finals?

His last, best chance, Dirk got injured in the WCFs and lost to SA. Any one of about 6 WC teams would have beaten NJ that year. Mark Cuban had Donnie dismantle the team to get rid of Raef's contract the next off season.

uptempo wrote:We lived thru Nelson I a decade ago.

GS hasn't been to playoffs since.

uptempo wrote:He didn't do the job in Milwaukee;

He did a great job in Milwaukee and his teams were noted for hard nosed defense, featuring All-NBA defender, Sydney Moncrief.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in Golden State;

He at least had them in the playoffs, a level not reached since he left.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in NY;

He was fired with a 34-25 record, better than his successors 13-10 record. He got an"incomplete" on that one.

uptempo wrote:he didn't do the job in Dallas;

That's a flat out lie. He took a wreck of a team and turned it into a title contender. We were worried the team would move away it was so bad. Apathy abounded. That's the worst thing to have.

uptempo wrote:and he won't do the job in Golden State.

Opinion. Hide and watch.

uptempo wrote:He is a good coach; however, to be a great coach, you have to win a championship.

You have to have the right players. MJ, Pippen, Shaq and Kobe have made Phil Jackson into a great coach. The difference in good and great coaches is whether or not you have the right players and whether or not they buy what you're selling. Did Larry Brown suddenly turn into a bad coach when he got to NY? He was great in Detroit and as a college coach.

Jeez, it's been a little under a week (with a couple Warriors preseason games) since I've posted, and there have been no good new topics to talk about. My God.

Let's try resurrecting a successul one to jump start some conversation:

#32 wrote:Troy Murphy *****Don Nelson is a huge fan of big men who can play the perimeter. All summer, Troy Murphy had his bags packed. After today, he might as well keep his house payments going. Murphy is incredibly similar to another player Don Nelson made into a star (perhaps you've heard of him): Dirk Nowitski. The only difference between the two (physically) is that Dirk is an inch taller and Murphy is a tad stronger.

What's truly exciting about this is that Murphy has an already-established NBA reputation for improvement. His huge rebounding numbers, outside touch, and movement without the ball were all tricks he picked up after being drafted. If Murphy can add huge points to his game like that, what's stopping him from being everything Nelly can sculpt him into? I'm not saying he'll become the next Dirk overnight... but, if Troy Murphy averages numbers closer to 17 and 10 next year (with improved percentages across the board), I wouldn't be surprised.

If there's one player (other than Dunleavy) that Golden State fans can't decide on, it's Murphy. You can read what i wrote about him above. Any thoughts?

#32 wrote:Jeez, it's been a little under a week (with a couple Warriors preseason games) since I've posted, and there have been no good new topics to talk about. My God.

Let's try resurrecting a successul one to jump start some conversation:

#32 wrote:Troy Murphy *****Don Nelson is a huge fan of big men who can play the perimeter. All summer, Troy Murphy had his bags packed. After today, he might as well keep his house payments going. Murphy is incredibly similar to another player Don Nelson made into a star (perhaps you've heard of him): Dirk Nowitski. The only difference between the two (physically) is that Dirk is an inch taller and Murphy is a tad stronger.

What's truly exciting about this is that Murphy has an already-established NBA reputation for improvement. His huge rebounding numbers, outside touch, and movement without the ball were all tricks he picked up after being drafted. If Murphy can add huge points to his game like that, what's stopping him from being everything Nelly can sculpt him into? I'm not saying he'll become the next Dirk overnight... but, if Troy Murphy averages numbers closer to 17 and 10 next year (with improved percentages across the board), I wouldn't be surprised.

If there's one player (other than Dunleavy) that Golden State fans can't decide on, it's Murphy. You can read what i wrote about him above. Any thoughts?

I think Murphy is too soft and not very agressive. Even if Murphy is stronger than Dirk, Dirk is a lot agressive than Murphy. I don't think Murphy is ready to step up in a role similar to Dirk. In Dallas Dirk is the number 1 option. In GS, Murphy is the 2nd or even 3rd option. I see him improving a little, but I don't see much change in him. 12pts - 7rebs maybe.